https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2019/05/18/justin-amash-trump-mueller-report-impeachable-conduct/3724743002/

Opinion: Rep. Justin Amash says “Trump committed impeachable offences!”.

This issue, impeachment, is a subjective political issue and not a hard and fast issue of law, which is more objective and hard and fast. When the one poses as the other and confuses the aspiring politician, what do we have? Politics.

Trump and his to the line style of operation, both a result of his personal style and his initial learning curve in politics that does not exactly mesh well with the political world (Thank God) or the “Accepted norms of the body politic” as Jerrold Nadler (Tool) would say. Is the only viable way at the moment to retaining power in our government and to acquiring power in the future. Justin Amash, a well known power house (?) and “potential” presidential challenger to Trump in 2020 (Right) sees the need to make some noise.

I think Justin has just shortened his career in politics by decades. And that is probably a good thing for all involved.

With (il)logic like that, everyone should vote for me, because not only am I already a conservative, but I would also surround myself with more and better conservatives than Trump does.

Being successful in business does not require being surrounded by conservatives, otherwise there would be a whole lot of liberal-run companies out of business. All the liberal businessmen need is to be cronies of powerful people in government. Which is how Trump has looked so successful, these past few years.

That Trump does not know what conservativism means is very telling about how he will rule in the future. Is he going to be the president or is he going to be the puppet of some actual conservatives? Seeing his ego, being a puppet is not for him. Watching his campaign, listening to others is not for him. From his several bankruptcies, learning from mistakes is not for him. From his lack of preparation for debates, competence is not for him.

You guys really need to come up with compelling reasons to vote for tyranny rather than liberty. The argument, “so that the other tyrant does not get into office” hadn’t worked for months, and it will never work.

You guys keep doing the same thing, over and over, expecting different results.

Trump, I believe, just wants to be president. He is smart enough to know that to get there, and be successful, he needs the support of the “common person” like myself, or the blue collar workers who have lost from the Wall Street oriented politicians. This is not disimilar to Regan. However, just writing this, I see a vast different with Regan; the reason we do not particularly like the fellow.

No, I believe not. This selection of conservatives shows he is a shrewd and competent business man. He is a bully; and the ones I have known learn how to do a job and personnel selection is how they get things done. Will he make mistakes? Well, is he human? We know the types of mistakes Hillary makes. The people Trump has around him should keep him from making similar ones.

Besides, there is no one else who can beat Hillary. The third or 4th parties only hurt him. If the Bushes etc really want Hillary in then they will encourage the others in the race.

ken anthony
October 6, 2016 at 8:15 pm

Your comment seems logical!

Cotour – keep up the sound arguments. You have more spunk that I.

You gave us a guy whose selling point is that he isn’t Clinton. Since that was the best you could come up with, you don’t have a good handle on things.

Despite these attempts to transfer blame for your mistake, this is still all on you.

And you propose that you have a better handle on things.

Now you are pretending to be stupid, and everyone here sees through it. They all know my position, as I have made it clear on multiple occasions. As ken anthony said, “with just this one statement you thoroughly discredit yourself.”

You wrote: “That is certainly a matter of subjective opinion on your part”

But it wasn’t subjective opinion when you implied that you were the one who understands what is going on? I clearly made a better case for understanding what is going on than you have done, and your arguments continue to show that you do not see the big picture but focus only on one small, tiny, miniscule portion of the whole.

Despite your continued — and unacceptable — attempts to transfer blame for your plight, this is still all on you.

Your now apparent support for Clinton is disturbing.

Your introducing the concept of politicians and political party’s having “principles” in the context of what they do and how they operate was a bit careless on your part. My refining what you said was necessary in order that anyone reading these posts not be confused as they would automatically attach the concept of morality with the word “principles”.

“Thus, I have a better understanding of what is going on than you do, Cotour”

That is certainly a matter of subjective opinion on your part, just like that PHD. candidate who does not believe that woman and minorities are able to be objective related to science, so science should be changed to suit her theory. That sounds just about right to me.

Of course politicians have principles. They are just different than yours or mine. Apparently different enough that you do not recognize them. Democrats have principles, and they stick to them enough to be able to “move the ball down the field” election cycle after election cycle.

“Principles would indicate morality … ”

… or immorality, or amorality. Principles are only a basis for conduct, not right conduct. Morals are a basis for right conduct. You have conflated the two words, but they have that subtle — yet important — difference in meaning.

You wrote: “There is only winning in politics and when you have been empowered by the people through winning you set an agenda and attempt to fulfill it.”

Here you have even defined a couple of principles that you believe that politicians follow. This is not an agenda, so who has confused agenda with principles? That’s right, you did, Cotour.

Thus, I have a better understanding of what is going on than you do, Cotour. Right down to the part where you have tried to blame me for your own poor voting choices. Choices which you apparently made because you did not understand what was going on.

You believe that Clinton is the worst choice, but what is going on is that reasonable people can reasonably think that Trump is worse than Clinton. Or maybe some reasonable people publicly support Clinton so that they are on the winning side when her tyranny starts punishing people. You reasonably want to be on Trump’s winning side when his tyranny starts punishing people.

You are not looking at the big picture, Cotour. You only look at the part of the picture where Clinton is a poor president, but due to your myopic focus, you have missed the rest of the picture. This is why you have such a difficult time convincing anyone to vote for your guy, Trump. You assume that everyone is as focused as you on how bad Clinton is without seeing what others — other reasonable people — have long ago seen.

This is OK. You get to vote for whomever you want, just as I get to vote for whomever I want.

But you will not get what you think you will get, because you are expecting things that Trump has not promised.

Thinking that the liberal Democrat Trump’s conservative advisers will magically change him into a conservative, when he cannot even describe what a conservative is or believes, is like thinking that Clinton would magically change into a conservative if she had a bunch of conservative advisers.

Do you remember eight years ago, when Obama said that he had 300 advisers to tell him how to be president? With that many, he should have been the best president ever. Obviously, he chose to ignore them and rule as an absolute monarch. Advisers are no guarantee that their advice will be followed.

Despite your continued attempts to transfer blame for your plight, This is still all on you.

But now I understand that you will never take responsibility for your own mistake.

Edward, with just this one statement you thoroughly discredit yourself.

I assume you wish to limit tyranny? Most of the argument against Trump is pure fear of the unknown. The attacks against him are childish, “he said something mean!”

Hillary is thoroughly known. Declaring them equivalent is lefty logic.

The “Democrats” are not for one minute sticking to “their” principles, they are sticking to a winning strategy (their Borg like loyalty and enforcement of their rules of operation) in order to win. Then after they win they implement their agenda. You are mistakenly confusing the two.

Two very different things and if you think they have their principles you are incorrect. I repeat, there are no principles in politics. You have principles, I have principles, humans have principles, but politicians have no principles.

Principles would indicate morality, and there is also no morality in politics either. Have you been drinking again Edward? There is only winning in politics and when you have been empowered by the people through winning you set an agenda and attempt to fulfill it. Your confusing agenda with principles.

Principles and morality in politics, what are you thinking? This is your moment of facing your mistaken understanding of what you think is going on and realize what is really going on and come to your senses.

Yet when I have a third option, a best choice but one which you do not like, you mock me for wanting to take it. Not only were you unwilling to take the best choice during the primary, leaving us with a mess, but you continue to be unwilling to take the best choice during the general election, leaving us with an even bigger mess. Well done you [Sarcasm alert!].

You wrote: “I just believe that you come to an incorrect conclusion related to this particular and specific subject.”

Duh. Of course you believe that, but you are wrong. You understand my point of view, because you secretly wish you had chosen Ted Cruz (you are also wrong in your assumption about Cruz, there were four nominees that I was the most interested in, but by the time my state’s primary election came around, only five Republican candidates remained on the ballot, although — thanks to you — only Trump had not already dropped out: Carson, Cruz, Gilmore, Kasich, and Trump).

You wrote: “PS: There are no principles in politics”

Then why do the Democrats and liberals consistently stick to their principles — and continually win — while you violated yours by voting for the one liberal Democrat who had infiltrated the Republican primary — and continually lose? Oh, that’s right, because you incorrectly think that there are no principles in politics, that it is right and true to violate principles in order to “win.” What you won, of course, is not what you wanted, but that’s what you get when you dump your principles in order to claim winner’s bragging rights ad infinitum.

Because tyranny is the certain outcome, it is no skin off my nose to stick to my principles. That you cannot accept principles in politics is your problem, not mine. It is not that I don’t care about your problem; I do, but I want you to have something that is all your own (I won’t make the argument, here, that the results of your problem adversely affect me). Too bad you are going to foist your tyrannical government onto the rest of us. (Oops. I think I just made that argument.)

Just because you mucked up is no reason to blame me. This is the bed that you made.

As you implied with your ad infinitum about Cruz: you voted in the primary for the tyrant; you made the bed that you do not like. Do not attempt to transfer it to others. Grow up and grow a pair; admit to your terrible mistake, and figure a way out of your mess. I will NOT under any circumstances help to dig yourself further into the hole you made for us all; I will not vote for a tyrannical candidate.

I admitted months ago that my first four choices were all gone. Now it is time for you to admit that you have left us with no choice but tyranny for the foreseeable future. I had nothing to do with it, and your pathetic attempts to shift blame for your shame are not acceptable.

You are the one who left us with these poor and bad choices. Rather than voting for someone who would present a diversity of political opinion, in the primary, you chose someone who was so similar to Clinton that many Republicans actually are considering voting Democrat, this cycle, since — as several Republicans have argued — she arguably is the lesser of the two evils. You believe otherwise, but you could be wrong on that, too. Your judgement has been very poor, this year; Trump would fire you, if he didn’t think of you as a crony.

Now you insist that we choose one of the bad choices rather than the best choice left available to us. It is you who have continually come to incorrect conclusions related to this particular and specific subject.

This is all on you.

And we move on.

If not, then we choose fatalism and fatalism requires that we just end our lives because we are presented with bad options all around. I do not operate like that. Get out your lemon squeezer Wayne, we are going to make lemonade!

The Voting Paradox:
1) Voting is non-transitive, and subject to cycling.
2) Majority Rule in pair-wise comparisons, does NOT lead to a single outcome.
3) “Majority Rules,” is actually “Rock, Paper, Scissors.”
“The voting paradox is an example of irrational results that can result from majority-rule voting.”
This was very evident in the republican primaries. rank-order preferences were not translated into a global choice.

“In social choice theory, “Arrow’s impossibility theorem,” the “General Possibility Theorem” or “Arrow’s paradox” is an Impossibility theorem stating that when voters have three or more distinct alternatives (options), no ranked-order voting system can convert the ranked preferences of individuals into a community-wide (complete and transitive) ranking while also meeting a pre-specified set of criteria.”

We wound up with Trump in the republican primaries, precisely because of the paradox of voting. And the fact the republican primary’s are designed to force an early choice, in sequential separate (State) voting.

[Andrew_W touched on this peripherally when he mentioned alternative ways of voting.]

But you can’t have Ted Cruz Edward. But you want Ted Cruz, you voted for Ted Cruz. But you can not have Ted Cruz. But you want Ted Cruz. But you can’t have Ted Cruz, But you want Ted Cruz.

And on and on it goes, into eternity, and all the while while this ridiculous argument about immutable political principles goes on someone like Hillary is allowed to assume the presidency and further fulfill the “Thousand Points Of Light”, New World Order, One World Government, Internationalist dreams of the Neocons and the Left. (Yes the Neocons and the Left are working to the same ends IMO)

PS: There are no principles in politics, there is winning and compromise. Like Hillary, your inappropriate application of your personal principles into politics is equivalent to only being left with one choice, a bad choice. At least with Trump there is room for another potential.

But you want Ted Cruz, but you can’t have Ted Cruz, but you want Ted Cruz. And on and on it goes. And I absolutely understand your point of view, I just believe that you come to an incorrect conclusion related to this particular and specific subject.

Your position leaves only ONE potential.

But you want me to vote for your guy because you fear that without my vote he cannot win. Therefore, you are not confident that your guy can win, either. Since it makes no difference to me whether Trump or Clinton wins — and you continue to not convince me that your guy is better than my guy — I will continue to protest the Republican Party my way, the same as you protested the Republican Party be putting in a Democrat as their candidate.

It may make a difference to you which tyrant leads the country, but to me, they are still the same.

An analogy is that you want me to vote for the equivalent of a black hole, sucking freedom and liberty from the rest of the world, but compared to your black hole, my brown dwarf is a shining beacon. The black hole that you don’t want to win looks, to me, just like the black hole that you favor.

Just because you wasted your primary vote on a tyrant, and now want to waste your vote on that same tyrant, does not mean that I should waste my vote, too. Or are you now going to tell me that I wasted my primary vote? And if voting for the guy who does not win is a wasted vote, then why were your votes for president in 2012 and 2008 not wasted votes?

I have voted for losing candidates in the past and I will vote for losing candidates in the future. It does not scare me. Just because my guy cannot win is no reason to abandon him for someone that will not do what I want him to do.

You wrote: “And here the stalking horse candidate reveals the real agenda.”

And that is still your problem, not mine. You are completely failing to see this from my point of view — the desire for freedom and liberty — but only from your point of view, never Clinton. Just because you fail to see the failings of Trump does not mean that they are not there.

You got to do your protest, now I get to do mine.

You wrote: “Was never a player, in the race”

I really don’t care about that. According to you, I will end up with a tyrant, so I will finally get in my protest. That you are so upset about my choice shows that my protest will have its desired effect.

Once again, it is too bad that you chose poorly during the primary election. You left me with nothing but poor or bad choices, so I will make the best choice possible: the poor choice.

You wrote: “More logical proof that Trump is preferred over Clinton:”

So, our president not getting along with the rest of the world is a good thing?

You wrote: “Those who are unable to understand what must be understood are their own enemies.”

Which makes you your own worst enemy. You do not understand that you should vote for what you want, not for what you don’t want. You continue to not understand that I. Just. Don’t. Care. whether Trump wins over Clinton or Clinton wins over Trump. That is a problem that you have, not me. It is you who thinks that there is a difference worth worrying about, but for those of us who want freedom and liberty, there isn’t.

Phill O,
You wrote: “Cotour makes some compelling arguments for doing the utmost to keep the Clintons from regaining power.”

But he makes no compelling argument for doing the utmost to give Trump even more tyrannical power than he already has. It seems that one of two tyrants will gain power, this election cycle, and no one has presented a compelling reason that one should win over the other. We have two evils and some not-so-bads running. I will not vote for either evil.

Just the fact that he needs to surround himself with conservatives in order to figure out how to be a conservative demonstrates that he is the wrong choice. Thus, the arguments already made in his favor are not compelling for Trump, and many are compelling for anyone except Trump. No wonder so many Republicans are willing to vote for Clinton rather than Trump, and that should tell you that Trump is a terrible choice. You guys may have decided that one is worse than the other, but it is hard to see it from this far to the right.

You have an Obama-like hope that he will suddenly change his stripes after becoming president — if being president is what he wants. He seems to be hardly trying.

Scorched earth by Democrats, if Trump wins, is yet another reason to not vote for Trump.

You wrote: “With Hillary, they will be lost much faster!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

Listen to Trump sometime. He also does not like the freedoms that the rest of us have, but he likes the freedoms that the ruling class enjoys. The freedoms that the rest of us enjoy are a problem, for him. For instance: our freedoms make him powerless to punish anyone who says things about him that he does not like. He may strip us of freedoms much faster than you think.

Yes, I have kept honeybees. I have trapped an Africanized colony in NM and am trying to get them in a regular box so can work with them. They have some traits which are good. The Weavers in Texas have developed some genetics that have these traits and are “relatively” gentle. I hope to get another hive in Alberta next spring, just for the fun of it.

One point of interest here with genetics is what some queen breeder friend have found (consistent with the second law of thermo in a way) is that without consistent critical selection applied by a breeder, the genetic traits are lost within two generations. Kind of reminds one of politics when a good president is in place and gets removed.

I can sympathize with your choices for press. However, as much as we all have some issues with Trump, look at whom he is surrounding himself with.

I have watched the slow loss of freedoms in Canada over that last 50 years. They are gone! It was always with logical arguments that they were relinquished. With Hillary, they will be lost much faster!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My question is will you let that happen?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/717627/free-speech-crackdown-EU-report-British-press-hate-crime-violence-terror

We can not be far behind if Hillary becomes the president.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/299310-un-makes-power-play-against-donald-trump

Those who are unable to understand what must be understood are their own enemies. And, we are all waiting to know who the other mysterious candidate for president is. I love a good mystery, and this is one of the best I have heard of in a long time.

Americas 18.8 TRILLION dollar debt, driven up by Bush jr. and basically doubled over Obamas term is a part of this clear to me agenda of American economic destruction in order to bring it to heal in the One World Government model. How else could you possibly coerce America? Obama, the enemy within.

If you had to choose between a presidential candidate who was right on board with this agenda or you could choose between a candidate that may well be against it, who would you choose? (if you had to choose)

Guess what? YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE!

Cotour– come on…

Edward– empathize greatly with your views. You’ve been consistent for months– do whatever you think is correct. (I for one, will give you no hassle.)

————————————————-
We are already over-the-edge & falling hard, no matter who wins.
And one election… will NOT fix this, at all. It won’t even scratch the surface.
Mitch/Ryan run the show 100%, and likely will into the future. They LOVE Obama/Hillary/Trump, the person they hate more than anything, is Ted Cruz and all Conservatives.
Just wait until the Market drops 4,000 points in 20 minutes & everyone heads for the exits.
The subsequent Orgy of Spending, will boggle the mind.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/bill-weld-is-shifting-his-focus-from-a-libertarian-win-to-a-trump-defeat/

Was never a player, in the race only to reinforce the status quo agenda and Democrat / RINO American paradigm, surrender American sovereignty and trade our Constitution for a One World model of governance.

(whether he realizes it or not, and who would conclude that these professional politicians do not?)

“You seem to think that your arguments should convince me to vote for Trump, but they do not. You tell me reasons to not vote for Clinton, but you give no good reasons to vote for Trump”

Reread what you wrote and logically figure it out using your high IQ, sarcasm challenged engineer brain, you can do it.

Heres a hint (“your” guy, whom ever that is, can never win the presidency. If Trump does not win then Hillary will. In this logic test / equation Trump is preferable to Hillary )

Cotour makes some compelling arguments for doing the utmost to keep the Clintons from regaining power. There are vast differences between Hillary and Donald and it is best seen by the people they surround themselves with. I see Trump gathering quite conservative thinkers. Hillary gathers reactionaries a volatile personnel. Hillary’s people seem more like the NAZI’s brown shirts.

When Trump wins, expect a scorched earth by the democrats. The rioters are who they have been conscripting through Obama’ old friend (and Bill’s pardon of) Bill Ayers. The racial hatred by the Hillary supporters is incredible, but few (except Bob) will say this. One good example is the “Shootout at Miracle Valley” if Baltimore and Ferguson are not good enough.

Are we allowed to protect ourselves with firearms? When we are out in the middle of nowhere, if we are attacked by an armed criminal — when our safety depends upon seconds, or fractions thereof — the police are only minutes away.

Does New Zealand consider our rights to be natural rights that the government cannot infringe, or does their government believe that they were kind enough to bestow them upon us and can remove them at their own convenience?

Phill O,
Is that sarcasm? I am Sarcasm Impaired. (I’m sure that is not the malady you mean.)

Your guy is just as bad as Clinton. Just because Clinton is corrupt does not mean that Trump is any better. He just has a lifetime of becoming set in the ways of a different kind of corruption, which he bragged about before you voted for him in the primary.

Your comparison of voting for Trump or Clinton with getting shot in the ass is the best analogy that you have come up with. However, my guy will not shoot us in the ass, if elected, and none of us needs to use Obamacare to recover from wounds to our butts.

I choose to vote for the kind of government that I want rather than choose between two kinds of government corruption that I do not want. Who would ever vote for getting shot in the ass?

To vote for someone who will not give you what you want and then expect to get what you want is folly. It is the opposite of how the democratic system is supposed to work; we are supposed to get what we vote for, not get what the Republican Party gave us after we supported them in 2014 to give them both the House and the Senate. This time around, they aren’t even bothering to lie to us that if we elect the Republican candidate then we will finally get what we voted for them to do, because whether Trump or Clinton is elected, we still will not get it.

If you had wanted me to vote for the Republican Party’s guy, then during the primaries you should have chosen a guy worth voting for, rather than the Clinton clone.

“Occurred January 22, 2016 / Matawai, Gisborne, New Zealand. Watch as a huge flock of sheep takes over a New Zealand road.”